I thought the same as you.
1 Like
Yeah I think youāre right but perhaps in his defence, when trading players for picks, there is the āknownā quantity of the player and the āunknownā risky prospect of the Draft pick (huge variance of outcome).
In our case here I think hindsight has shown Dylan has underperformed against what we rated as a āknownā quality/quantity of a damaging/dominant clearance midfielder who was on the verge of regular AA contention. Who would also help us win games at a time we were coming into contention of top 4/top 6.
Vs Grants opinion which is that because he plays pretty good sometimes and still has the capability to do so for more years, that it was still a good outcome.
Vs Samās opinion which is that the opportunity cost of having Dylan underperform during dark years means we
- Miss out on 2x 1st rounders (potentially huge upside)
- Slow down on development of existing young players who donāt get that spot in the team (eg Parish)
- The fact we have been a bottom 8 quality team for almost all the years since 2018 makes it a further opportunity cost in terms of spending Draft capital in trading for the wrong types of players at the wrong time.
A lot of it is hindsight but Iād tend to agree with Samās assessment
1 Like
Shiel hasnāt been a failure, he has been serviceable. You jsut wonder if we could have got better bang for buck at the draft, maybe maybe not.
But the problem is we thought he was going to instantly improve the midfield, but was the wrong type to do this. Thankfully we have Setterfield now, and with Scott, seem to have a focus to bring in bigger mids to balance the list somewhat.
1 Like
And the same six backs that were almost the worst in the competition last season.
Also, those that had him number 1 saw him as a defender, with his strength being that he can lock down opponents.
1 Like
If Shiel didnāt make our midfield better, then itās a stretch to say Setterfield will, no matter how tall he is.
1 Like
Shiel certainly made our midfield better. However he only improved the existing strengths of the list (pace, centre clearances) while amplifying existing weaknesses (ball use, defence and lack of scoreboard production)
2 firsts was a lot to pay for a type of player we already had a better version of on the list in Parish
2 Likes
Iāve always agreed with that part.
1 Like
We are entering our 5th year with Shiel at the club. It has been an absolute failure.
The midfield looked at its best last year, when he wasnāt there.
4 Likes
I think changing the whole setup will make it better.
issue is Shiel / Merrett / Parish egoās of not playing full time mid and finding spot for them so we get to run more players through thereā¦
They are all best 22. But I think Scott will want to get more time into Stringer, Setterfield, Martin, Perkins, Hobbs who all play a slightly different style.
I would like to use Merrett off half back more to use his kicking and protect him from getting roughed up. Probably play the role Heppell was last year. except better disposal.
But having the options to throw Merrett/McGrath into midfield full time to cover injuries would be good as well.
2 Likes
I think we will need to trade 1-2 out, and start again.
Itās not a Premiership midfield.
1 Like
For A player who finally turns up and performs, when the season is already lost.
Pretty f*cking meaningless imo.
Itās very conclusive that the trade has been a failure so far. But thereāa still time to turn it around (but not a lot of time).
I agree that combo doesnāt work, I just donāt see Setterfield specifically really making any difference.
Iād personally start Hobbs, Perkins, Caldwell as often as possible, as thatās our future midfield.
Iām also a bit reluctant to push Zac Merrett out of the midfield. The guy has been one of the better and most consistent midfielders in the game over a number of years. And heās still in his prime. Building a different mid structure around him would be the first place to start.
As for Shiel, he was pretty decent in the back half of last year, but for where we are at the momentā¦ Heās kind of in the way.
I wouldnāt say itās ego - but list balance.
We spent pick 5, 9, 13 and 26 on three on ballers who have similar weaknesses (you can also throw in the pick 1 we used on McGrath). That draft capital would have been better spent on other areas.
One option we do have would be to move Merrett to halfback to fix our turnover/kicking issue there. But I know most here donāt like that idea
1 Like
True, the season was already lost, but he did cop the brunt of what was a complete team sh**show. And, was the only one to respond for the second half of the year
Shiel is the equivalent of a bloke that starts performing when theyāre about to get the sack.
And people are celebrating this.
Shiel is the highest paid player in Essendon historyā¦ Think about that.
Similar could be said of Stringer.
Stringer is the equivalent of a bloke that starts performing when theyāre after a new contract.
we just havenāt been able to get all our mids running well at the same time.
Parish/Merrett/Mcgrath went alright for a bit.
Stringer had a purple patch, SHiel had a purple patch.
1 Like
2021 version of Parish, Merrett, Stringer, was pretty friggin good.
2 Likes
But this discussion is about the cost of Shiel.